I wish to add my condolences to anyone affected or caught up in this tragic accident. I also want to say that I do not mean any offence in my comments that follow and I hope that no-one interprets them this way, I just wish to add a factual approach.
To be fair I think the description of elderly planes flown by even more elderly pilots is a bit too harsh.
Firstly, the medical a pilot has to go through every year in order to keep their license is stringent and no exceptions whatsoever will be made. They will be carried out by specialist aviation consultants. So it could be that a 65 year old is passed fit, but a 35 year old has his licence cancelled due to an anomaly on a test. They do have the works - heart tests, lung tests and also are in conjunction with the usual GP. How many car drivers have to undergo these sorts of medicals every year? Perhaps PSV / HGV drivers - I'm not sure.
Secondly, the hoops that have to be jumped through in order for a pilot to obtain - and then keep - a display authorization. The exact routine has to be performed and okayed. At air shows, a team, usually from the organisation committee is watching the pre-planned and approved routine at all times and will have no hesitation to warn a pilot, or indeed order him down if they think he has been unsafe. Any infringements outside his display time are also taken into account.
A note about the aircraft themselves. They are subject to CofA tests "Certificate of Airworthiness", which go into so much detail, it can't really be described. Much more than your average MOT. They are worked out on years / hours. We have an 80 year old aircraft in the family and every 3 years or "x" amount of flying hours, the aircraft is stripped and inspected. The propeller is removed and examined under a big microscopic computer for any signs of cracks and stress - metal fatigue - in the metal. Any problems or cracks and an entire rebuild is ordered. The process can take quite a few weeks. Other maintenance checks are carried out at other intervals between the 3 years. At 80 it is in better condition than some cars I see on the road!!
The timing varies depending on the individual aircraft type, but it really is as detailed as every single nut and bolt, internal and external and engine wise, being checked and rechecked. It has to be signed off before being allowed back into the air and then a test flight, including aerobatic manouveres is carried out in order to ensure all is well.
Think the point I'm trying to make is that with proper maintenance of both aircraft and pilot, age should not be and is not the issue.
With regards to the displays. For decades, aircraft at airshows have not been allowed to overfly the crowd or perform any part of the display over them. (The one exception to the rule are the Red Arrows, who can overfly the crowd on the entrance run, but after this point are not allowed near them). There is a flight safety line and they quite simply cannot cross this. Doing so would result in removal of the display authorization mentioned earlier - and once lost this is extremely, extremely hard to get back.
Regarding the comments about built up areas, I think they cannot be held "only" on coastal airports as this will greatly reduce the available airports. In addition, all airports have space at the ends of any runways. They may briefly overfly busy roads, but not hugely built up areas and the reason for this is very simple. When the crash occurs, space is needed. Google map any airport and you'd see what I mean. The most dangerous part of flying is take off and landing and yet every single day, hundreds of airliners fly over the M25 out of or into Heathrow, at the statistically most dangerous part of flight, yet no-one is calling for this flightpath to be banned. Similarly at Gatwick, but not as many aircraft, but over the M23.
Each airshow also has a predefined display area, which takes into account buildings, population and the local area. Not all risks can ever be eliminated, but the utmost is done to reduce them as much as possible. There is always risk in everything we do.
This was without any doubt an extremely tragic, but also extremely rare accident and I think a blanket ban would be a knee jerk reaction and wrong. I hope I have not trivialized the accident at all, I really don't mean it that way and also know emotions are running extremely high, quite understandably, but I do feel in order to make any decisions, factual information is needed.
Like I say, I mean no offence, but sadly sometimes, we simply cannot predict or prevent all accidents. One last note, some years ago, a vastly experienced display pilot was sadly killed in a road accident caused by another driver becoming critically ill at the wheel. Could this has been predicted, at the moment and time? No. Also, no-one then called for all cars to be banned from the roads.
I hope this makes sense to everyone and like I say, I mean absolutely no offence whatsoever.
